U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 1968

A. L. Mechling Barge Lines, Inc. v. Derby Company, Ltd.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Decided August 5, 1968 · Jones, Wisdom, Dyer

399 F.2d 304; 1968 A.M.C. 1436; 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 5871 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

J. Y. Gilmore, Jr., Faris, Ellis, Cut-rone, Gilmore & Lautenschlaeger, New Orleans, La., for A. L. Mechling Barge Lines, Inc., William S. Stone, Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles, New Orleans, La., for Derby Company, Ltd.; René S. Paysse, New Orleans, La., of counsel.

Cases that cite this one

12 later published cases cite this decision.

In re the Complaint of Boskalis Westminster International B.V. (United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida 2012)
Associated Dredging Co. v. Continental Marine Towing Co. (United States District Court Eastern District of Louisiana 1985)
The Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co. (Supreme Court of the United States 1972)
In re: B & J Inc (District Court, W.D. Louisiana 2023)
King Fisher Marine Service, Inc. v. The Np Sunbonnet, Her Engines, Etc., and Newpark Marine Services, Inc. (5th Cir. 1984)
Kenny Marine Towing, Inc. v. M/V John R. Rice (United States District Court Eastern District of Louisiana 1984)
Consolidated Grain & Barge Company v. Marcona Conveyor Corporation, Marcona Sales, Inc. v. Consolidated Grain & Barge Company (5th Cir. 1983)
CONSOL. GRAIN & BARGE CO. v. Wisconsin Barge Line (District Court, E.D. Missouri 1981)
McDonough Marine Service, Inc. v. M/V Royal Street (United States District Court Eastern District of Louisiana 1979)
Massman Construction Co. v. Sioux City & New Orleans Barge Lines, Inc. (District Court, W.D. Missouri 1979)
Wirth Limited v. SS Acadia Forest (United States District Court Eastern District of Louisiana 1974)
Coastal States Petrochemical Co. v. Montpelier Tanker Co. (District Court, S.D. Texas 1970)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

We agree with the holding below and adopt the district court’s opinion (“findings of fact and conclusions of law”) as the opinion of this Court. See 258 F.Supp. 206 (1966). We consider that Bisso v. Inland Waterways Corp., 1955, 349 U.S. 85, 75 S.Ct. 629, 99 L.Ed. 911 and Dixilyn Drilling Corp. v. Crescent Towing & Salvage Co., 1963, 372 U.S. 697, 83 S.Ct. 967, 10 L.Ed.2d 78, are relevant, if not necessarily controlling. We recognize the difference between negligence and unseaworthiness and between a private carrier and a common carrier. But we are dealing here with the construction of an exculpatory clause. Even if Bisso and Dixilyn were distinguishable, we would feel compelled to say that, absent plainly unambiguous language, a general exculpatory clause cannot be construed to mean that it relieves a shipowner of the obligation of furnishing a seaworthy vessel.

The judgment is affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.